okie wrote:Setanta, the problem arises in that terrorists are not covered by the Geneva Conventions, but we nevertheless have the policy of treating the prisoners humane anyway. And we are still in process of determining their status because the problem is they cannot be identified by any uniform they wore or any allegiance to any country.
The principle problem that i see here is your bigotted assumptions and apparent inability to comprehend what you read. If their individual cases have not been reviewed by a competent tribunal, then we don't know of these jokers are terrotists or not. And, in fact, if they were taken in arms on the battlefield, and were fighting for the Taliban, they are prisoners of war in the most exact sense, because the Taliban was the government of Afghanistan at the time of the 2001 invasion, whether or not you approve of the Talian.
If all prisoners were treated in a humane manner, there wouldn't be any argument about torture. If "we" are still in the process of determining their status, nearly five years after the invasion of Afghanistan, where is the competent tribunal called for in the Fourth Geneva Convention? Why has it taken five years, why are we "still in the process," and most telling, if we have not yet determined the status of these jokers (after almost five years), why do you call them terrorists?
Charged, tried and convicted in your mind, aren't they, Okie--and you don't even need to see any evidence.
